Los Angeles daily herald., 1887-12-07

found who had kepta copy OF the vote
in either precinct, and even the can
diiates did not know how the vote
stood. 1t was stated, however, that
the official count placed Mr.. Thurston
just four votes ahead OF his opponent
Newell Mathews.
III the second ward T. J. Cuddy wa.
elected by a very large majority. In
precinct ''B" alone he received 38S
votes, while Morgan received but I59
and Booth but 46.
In the Third ward J. F. Humph-
reys and Il. c. Bosbyshell, both Dem
ocrats, were elected. The vote in this
| ward for Councilmen was as follows ::
6. C. Buriingame }iRep.) ...... 81 81 ia
E G. Bosbyshell (Dem.) PIC 191 410
John E Humphreys tpem) .25s 23l 4o9
William Rommel CA. s.)....,125 III 300
In the Fourth ward B. Cohn was
elected for the long term, and B.
Chandler for the short term. Both
were on the Democratic ticket, aud
the vote for Councilmen in this ward
was as follows:
B, Cohu ....................=...# $50
b. Oh tndler ........... $3.50. .-=..-..... 2S3
j. McIlmuil ..... ........-... ...... 21O
]. W. b owning. acknowledgements. 243
Joseph w oodworth ............ ....... 14o
William Ruddy. ......-- .---.......... l3O
In the Fifth ward Capt. A. w. Bar
rett, Democrat, and DR.. II. Sinsa-
baugh, Republican Prohibitionist,
were elected. The vote in this ward
was as follows:
A. w. Barrett .......- .......s.......-. 2f9
W. r. Burke -. -...=.-.- --........- 900
j Fronkrnteld Observation-Disclosures. 222
Fl. Sinsabaugh .........-....--. 1868
j. c. Salisbury. ............. -. ....... 2O7
The Board of Education will in
clude DR.. j. S. Crawford, N. 5. En-
body and possibly Thomas Kelley,
although his seat is closely contested
for by G. E. Day, and the matter will
not be decided until Monday next.
There was considerable discussion on
he street and in the Council cham
bers as to the legality of the election
as called into question b. some of the
Republicans in the Council chamber.
City Click feed produced the en-
velores containing the ballots, but on
mo ion of Councilman Johnson it was
decided to defer opening them until
the opinion on the matt-r of the CITY
attorney had been presented i'll writ
ing.
After tie Council had adjourned
the opinions of some OF the leading
attorneys were sought in regard to
this action and it was the unanimous
decision that the Council had no right
-, .,lI int nunc4,a,, fhn lo.voIit Of no
election In their opinion the only
duty OF the Council was to open the
envelopes, canvas the returns and Or
der the City Clerk to issue the certifi-
Gates of election.
Later in the day it was learned that
the election in Sacramento had been
carried on under the same law as in
Los Angeles anu it was matter of
wonderment how two cities coull
have fal en- into the same error. if err
ror it was. In reference to the much
talked of question the following opin-
ion was received at this Office last
evening:
VALIDITY OF THE ELECTION.
EDITORS HERALD While the blum
der OF those who caused the election
to be held in violation of an important
amendment If the election law at the
last session of the Legislature is Who'll
" inexcnsable, and impeacheS the Of
fetal character of those who did it and
should result in their removal from
office. yet the effect OF it is wholly
misunderstood and its Importance
greatly exaggerated. The law. that
is the city charter, provides for an
election, designates the day on which
it is to be held, the places, the forms
under which it is to be conducted, the
officers to have it in charge, the bal
lots, the officers to be chosen
and other earmarks, enough OF
all which were part of the
recent election to point it ont and
identify it as the election provided
for by the law. The election which
the. city charter says shall be held ut
this time has been held and having
been held, some one has been elected
to each of the offices voted for. Who
these elected officers are, is to be de-
termined at least, in the first instance,
by the votes cast, which are evil
denced by the returns whose results
are to be certified by the officers.
These certificates are made by the
law itself, the clear and indefea-ible
prima facie title deeds to the offices.
Whatever may he done afterwards,
these certificates give to their posses
sors, in The first instance, their re-
spective offices. Ii it is claimed that
there is mistake, illegality, fraud
or otbar error 9ybSrh cbnD1ed the
result, the law provides that the con-
testants who so claim shall pursue q
certain definite LEGAL course to make
manifest what was and should be de-
clared the true result Of the election
In the absence of tbs formal and or
derby contest the prima facie returns
and certificates OF the result remain
valid and in full force, and the per-
sons so returned and certified retain
their offices. Probably general
election has never been held in the
State that did not have more or less
illegality, but the idea of set-
ting it aside for that rea-
son for the whole State or in a
congressional or legislative district,
Or even in county has never been
thought OF and would be absurd and a
mockery of the electors in any case
where the election actually held cor
responded in its main features with
the election provided by the law.
Ii in any such case the proper
Ulcers whose duty the law makes it
to certify the results of the election